Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35660925›Full record

ArticleLaboratory medicine2022

Retrospective Assessment of a National Reflex Cryptococcal Antigen Screening Program in South Africa Through Interlaboratory Comparison of Lateral Flow Assay Results.

Nozuko P Blasich, Lindi M Coetzee, Charlotte Sriruttan, Daniel DeSanto, Gregory S Greene, Deborah K Glencross, Nelesh P Govender

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Laboratory medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 37% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nozuko P BlasichCentre for Healthcare-Associated Infections, Antimicrobial Resistance and Mycoses, National Institute for Communicable Diseases, a Division of the National Health Laboratory Service, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Lindi M CoetzeeSchool of Pathology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Charlotte SriruttanCentre for Healthcare-Associated Infections, Antimicrobial Resistance and Mycoses, National Institute for Communicable Diseases, a Division of the National Health Laboratory Service, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Daniel DeSantoCentre for Healthcare-Associated Infections, Antimicrobial Resistance and Mycoses, National Institute for Communicable Diseases, a Division of the National Health Laboratory Service, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Gregory S GreeneCentre for Healthcare-Associated Infections, Antimicrobial Resistance and Mycoses, National Institute for Communicable Diseases, a Division of the National Health Laboratory Service, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Deborah K GlencrossSchool of Pathology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Nelesh P GovenderCentre for Healthcare-Associated Infections, Antimicrobial Resistance and Mycoses, National Institute for Communicable Diseases, a Division of the National Health Laboratory Service, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0001-7869-9462
National Health Laboratory Service · ZA

Funding

Phased Implementation of a Public Health Programme: Cryptococcal Screening and Treatment in South AfricaR01AI118511 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI BOULWARE, DAVID R, GOVENDER, NELESH PREMAPRAGASAN · 2016 to 2020
$2.9M
CDC HHS CDC-RFA-GH15-1575NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI118511NIH HHS R01AI118511US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention CDC-RFA-GH15-1575
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveReflex cryptococcal antigen (CrAg) screening of blood specimens with a CD4 count of <100 cells/µL was performed at 45 South African CD4 laboratories using a lateral flow assay (LFA). Our objective was to evaluate the reliability of routine LFA results through comparative interlaboratory testing.

methodsAll CrAg-positive and a selected number of CrAg-negative samples from the CD4 laboratories were retested at paired microbiology laboratories using the same LFA. Samples with discordant results were tested at a reference laboratory, using the LFA (with CrAg titers).

resultsDuring interlaboratory testing, 12,502 samples were retested, with 93 (0.7%) discordant results and a between-laboratory agreement of 99.3% (Cohen's kappa, 0.98). The proportion of retested samples with discordant results ranged from 0.17% to 5.31% per laboratory pair (median 0.28%), with 3 reporting >3% of results as discordant.

conclusionRoutine CrAg screening results were reliable, with <1% of samples having discordant results, mainly due to interpretation and transcription errors.

Indexed as

CryptococcusHIV InfectionsMeningitis, CryptococcalAntigens, FungalCD4 Lymphocyte CountHumansMass ScreeningReflexReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesSouth AfricaAntigens, Fungaladvanced HIV diseasecryptococcal antigencryptococcal meningitisdiscordant resultsinterlaboratory comparisonlateral flow assay

Identifiers

PMID35660925
PMCPMC9631796
OpenAlexW4225498467

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.